Peer 1
The above stories by Gill are simply made up fairy tales.I repeat:"Gill's current comments simply confirm that he has yet to actually read the published paper and/or understand the first thing about…
The above stories by Gill are simply made up fairy tales.I repeat:"Gill's current comments simply confirm that he has yet to actually read the published paper and/or understand the first thing about…
No, we cannot.The argument presented in the paper has been understood perfectly well by the referees, the distinguished editors, and the august editorial board members of IJTP which approved the…
Nor would the referee(s) have been blind to the significance of Fig. 3 of the paper. Gill's comment you mention is thus a further proof that he has not bothered to read the paper at all before…
Please do discuss the science, "unregistered submitter". Please, check yourself the claim made in the initial submision, and report back here whether it seems valid or not.
I have checked the claims made in the initial submission and found them to be misguided. It appears that the critic has failed to understand the argument presented in the original paper.
Dear Unregistered Submitter, your long post with (a) (b) and (c) has turned up after all. I don't agree with you but perhaps we should discuss by email or at some suitable other forum or blog...
Ah, Unregistered Submitter, thanks for your comments. The last I heard (talks at Växjö, June 2014) was that, analysed appropriately and properly, *both* the Christensen et al...
I will continue to expose the underhand unethical tactics of Aaronson and Gill, such as the fact that they have (at least in the past) planted posts on the Internet in other people's name...
That is not common practice and I did not make a mistake. You can add a [sic] if you like and explain what you think is wrong, but you cannot simply change my words within quotations...
The pub peer forum is misused to settle some personal problems which is unfair. Please discuss the science of the paper titled, "Macroscopic Observability of Spinorial Sign Changes under 2π…
"1. Gill said that if Christian's framework couldn't be simulated on a classical computer, it is worthless. 1a. The framework was successfully computer simulated many times over, thanks to Chantal…
Thank you for your reply and have a joyful and prosperous 2015. I noticed you passed over the demonstration that the Christensen experiment actually confirms local realism (Giustina et al is…
My new thread can be found by searching for arXiv:1409.5158 (https://pubpeer.com/publications/E0F8384FC19A6034E86D516D03BB38). The paper is currently under submission and is in peer review, so…
Read my paper. It is very clear and clearly shows illegitimate post-selection. Decide for yourself!
Well, I wouldn't be surprised if you planted those posts as well, Mr. Gill, since you have a habit of doing so.
I wrote a long reply but on submission the forum timed out and lost my text! Wonderful.OK, instead of retyping it, I simply ask why you ignored my demonstration that the Christensen et al experiment…
Thanks, Peer 8. High time for a new and serious discussion!
Whether the experiment showed a violation or not is "not so important"? Are you kidding? The experiment decisively confirms local realism. The locality loophole is not an issue if the experiment doesn…
The science of the published paper is discussed in very simple, non-technical terms here: http://www.sciphysicsforums.com/spfbb1/viewtopic.php?f=6
What???Your words have *not* been modified, fraudulently or otherwise. What I quoted from your post was in complete accordance with the common literary practice of correcting a mistake in the…
"No. Programs have been presented that give results that violate Bell's and similar inequalities but without any proof that they simulate Christian's theory or that they satisfy locality or local…
Peer 1, you should stop accusing Profs. Aaronson and Gill of planting posts in Joy Christian's name all over the internet, since this gives the impression that you are a pathologically paranoid…
And that gives you the right to fraudulently modify my words when quoting them. Thank you for your explanation. I'm sure all will recognize and applaud its cogency.
However, both the initial comment and the first reply are strictly about the scientific content of the published paper.
Peer 1, whoever he is, calls me "Mr" instead of "Dr" because he knows I got the Diploma of Statistics (with distinction) at Cambridge University, UK, in 1974, a year after my Cambridge BA degree in…
"PS *if* Christian's experiment gets done, *and* the data is analysed precisely according to his own already published instructions, and *if* the four correlations of the CHSH-Bell test criterion are…
I wrote: "No. Programs have been presented that give results that violate Bell's and similar inequalities but without any proof that they simulate Christian's theory or that they satisfy locality or…
Is Peer 5 confident enough in his/her prediction to put his/her name on it? The author and Mr. Gill, to their credit, have put their names on what they predict would be the outcome of the experiment...
It is not a request. It is a test of the credibility of your opinion. From your response it is clear that either you are not confident of your prediction, or simply not qualified to make a judgement…
Thanks Peer 5, and Happy New Year to you too! My New Year's Resolution is to leave this thread alone till I get word from IJTP. My paper was allocated to an editor on December 9...
How do we know that "Peer 1" is "qualified to make a judgment on the outcome of the experiment"? Who and what is Peer 1 other than clearly a Joy Christian supporter?
Joy, if you are going to quote me directly within quotation marks, do not alter my text! That you do so seems to me to further underline your lack of integrity and civilized discourse...
Well, there you go projecting again, Gill. " ... a rather obscure physics journal ..."? The skirt of your jealousy shows quite prominently...
I agree. A large number of posts do not pertain to science but to cheap gossip for eample what the PhD advisor said about his student.
The details are quite different from what Gill claims. Let the readers of Hess's book judge for themselves. The errors are Gill's -- not Hess's, not Philipp's, not Christian's...
No, Mr. Gill, you don't claim anything. You simply plant the fraudulent letter all over the Internet, as many times as you get a chance, for no reason at all, as the author has already noted here…
I don't claim that Abner Shimony actually said what David Brown said he said. It is a mystery to me why Christian or Shimony did not get Scott Aaronson to remove that item from Aaronson's blog...
Richard Gill wrote:"Actually, nobody at all has reported that they ran through my computation and either agreed with it or otherwise identified an error and if so what precisely...
Well, Peer 1, I am both confident and qualified. Happy New Year!
"Any fool can make up a game that cannot be won". An even bigger fool plays it and claims repeatedly that he has won it.
@Richard GillAfter lauding Caroline Thompson and acknowledging that the inadequacy of EPRB experiments (excluding a few recent ones, see below) is now mainstream, you commented that you remain…
Why on earth should I agree to that request from someone called Peer 1?
Dear unregistered submitterI definitely am not certain that "quantum non-locality" will be definitely proven in the near future. I do report that the present generation of top experimentalists do…
"Peer 1: ( December 31st, 2014 9:15pm UTC )... And what makes you think that the data of other physics experiments have not been released selectively?"And, absent independent monitoring, the results…
"Unregistered Submission: ( December 31st, 2014 6:14pm UTC ).... Are you amenable to another bet about whether the CH inequality will be violated in a valid experiment that is properly analyzed (within…
Well, then, Peer 5, perhaps you can answer the question that Gill has refused to even acknowledge: what effect, if any, does a simply connected topology have on a physical model? Why or why not? …
"In fact, as [M]r. Gill shows, the proposed experiment cannot possibly show a violation."Mr. Gill shows no such thing. He simply miscalculates the upper bound on CHSH, because he has absolutely no…
Joy to you too!Integrity and civilized discourse are overrated. Those so-called "scientists" who pretend "integrity" and engage superficially in "civilized discourse" are the very ones who behind the…
Let's look at the record: 1. Gill said that if Christian's framework couldn't be simulated on a classical computer, it is worthless. 1a...
That is not for you to judge, but for the journal which decides to publish the results, and for the community which evaluates them afterwards...
Rather amusingly, Karl Hess actually ends up proving Bell's theorem in his book. He discusses the "Bell game" and explains why it can't be won...
Twisting facts once again, Mr. Gill?The "Bell game" and the physical experiments have nothing to do with each other.Any fool can devise a game that cannot be won...
I also agree.Perhaps it is worth ending with a quote from Peer 1 himself avowing Nature's hermaphroditic constitution:"Let no man but Nature bestow her verdict on herself...
What utter nonsense. Nonlocality isn't something that Bell invented; there is no proof of Bell's theorem without the assumption of nonlocality...
I just noticed that Joy Christian has himself explicitly claimed the "crackpot" epithet: http://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=993 comment number 583...
( December 30th, 2014 12:40am UTC ) is nearly as enigmatic as anything out of the Einstein Centre for Local-Realistic Physics, i.e., Joy Christian's flat in North Oxford...
"Those who support Christian through thick and thin should look deep in their hearts. What motivates them?"What motivates you, Gill?"I see a lot of vanity...
Peer 1 really is going insane now (i.e. losing all grip on reality). I corresponded with Caroline Thompson very amicably indeed for two years: 2003 - 2005...
Well, Mr. Gill (Diploma in Statistics), the truth has been spelt out by the author in detail here: http://www.sciphysicsforums.com/spfbb1/viewtopic...
I would rather believe Caroline Thompson's own account of events from her paper linked above and from her website than the above fabrications by Mr...
Caroline Thompson's article does not mention me. Her website does not mention me. Yes, she did suffer from the "Bell mafia", for many years, long before I even knew about Bell's theorem and all that...
An embarrassment to scientists, surely. The published paper, however, is no embarrassment to science -- or else the detractors would be addressing its contents, rather than its author.
Christian's LinkedIn and Amazon author pages suggest that he was continuously a member of various research departments at Oxford University for about 13 years up to 2014...
Once again Mr. Gill is trying to muster support from some dubious posts, which have been most likely planted by him only, on a private blog of someone who is well known to edit and modify his blog…
Awkward backpedaling doesn't make you look any better. You have no clue of either Bell's theorem, which assumes nonlocality, and is incoherent without that assumption -- or evolution, which assumes…
Oops! Thank you for the correction, Joy. Yes that was a simple schoolboy mistake. And you are a far bigger liar than I thought. 23 years at Oxford University! Rewarded at last by becoming Director of…
I agree that somebody should call "time out" here. I get half a dozen emails every day for this thread, and feel like am tuning in to a bunch of kindergarten children trowing sand at each other in…
"Poor Karl Hess worked with the late Walter Philipp who unfortunately forgot one of the three indices of one of the variables in their very complicated local hidden variables mode, somewhere in the…
Here is another blatant proof that Mr. Gill, QC, cannot do simple algebra, or even simple arithmetic. He thinks that from 1991 to 2014 adds up to 13 years (this is the second time on this thread that…
gentlemen, this thread is an embarassment to scientists.
Now I'm lost: what exactly does neuroscience have to do with this??
I wonder how many of the contributors to this thread are actually "gentlemen" or "scientists".I know that the above unregistered submitter is certainly neither (I wonder whether this time around he…
What puzzles me is this: Why do you think you are qualified to understand and voice your opinion about the author's mathematical analysis? Have you actually read the published paper? Do you even know…
I fully agree!!!
Bell's theorem has been blamed for a lot of wickedness, including New Age bogosity and, no doubt, the epidemic of online pornography. But the real blame for Quantum Mysticism rests more appropriately…
Neuroscience has nothing to do with this and this unregistered submitter (at 12:40am) is clearly a crackpot. Just another dead fly on Dr. Gill's windshield...
"What utter nonsense. Nonlocality isn't something that Bell invented; there is no proof of Bell's theorem without the assumption of nonlocality...
Even complete strangers seem to know exactly who --- literally --- are the real Bell mafia behind the scenes: http://www.sciphysicsforums.com/spfbb1/viewtopic...
I find the alleged letter by Shimony very puzzling, though it seems to me (knowing about the Hestenes - Shimony interactions, from David Hestenes) plausible that he has written such a letter...
Are we pretending to be Mr. Nice now, Mr. Gill. "[Caroline Thompson] certainly suffered from the "Establishment"", says Mr. Gill --- LOL --- forgetting to mention that it was no other than Mr...
This is why it is important to address quantum crackpots. Bell became a hype and a dogma. Yet most physicists have no idea at all what he achieved...
"Weatherall's paper got published in a very respectable journal specializing in quantum foundations." And Christian's paper got published in a very respectable journal specializing in theoretical…
This may seem tangential but it deals directly with the comparative credibility of Dr. Gill and Dr. Christian. The attached link is to screen-shots of Dr...
Foundations of Physics, in which Weatherall's paper was published, has a 2013 impact factor of 1.14 (compared to 1.188 for IJTP). Hardly that much of a difference...
This, from Einstein to Curie, may help: http://www.vox.com/xpress/2014/12/6/7342171/trolls-einstein-curie .
LOL! You are not fooling anyone, Mr. Gill. You may spin as many stories as you may like, but the facts --- as spelt out in my previous post --- are very clear and for all to see...
you know, i've tried to be really nice about this entire thing.given that i'm the one who has the evidence to "disprove" bell's theorem (seriously, how can a local hidden variable theory *not…
What I think is particularly interesting is to call anyone who refuses to pervert the QM rules of logic a member of the "bell mafia". On this point I agree with lubos motl on the fact that bell…
if i was dr shimony, i'd be posting here under my name to clear this up. this is getting pretty nasty.there was no need to drag in the supervisors...
This is the complete item (comment #95 on Scott Aaronson's second Joy Christian blog). Curiously, the poster, one David Brown, first expresses support for Christian...
Crackpottery at its finest. QM predicts entire distributions of possible events -- not just point statistics (like correlations). Again, even the outcome of the simplest two-slit experiment wreaks…
LOL! The point is that a totally fabricated letter from a former PhD advisor is being repeatedly posted on the Internet in order to defame a perfectly respectable scientist...
couldn't agree with you more unregistered submissions. youngsters should realize the difficulty of interfacing mathematics with intuition. if they don't, then they'll be caught in a vicious cycle...
The point is only to draw a distinction between what Dr. Christian thinks of himself ("best student") versus Shimony's actual assessment ("disappointed", "mixed opinion")...
Wow! The above post by Mr. Gill is loaded with double standards and fabrication of "facts", which are extracted from a private blog whose author is well known to manipulate and edit its content to…
Ah, that sounds like Fred Diether speaking. Unfortunately, the experiment can't show E(a, b) = - a.b. Because if it could, it could violate CHSH...
"No one has ever seen an "infinite Hilbert space" in any experiment, nor have they seen a "quantum entanglement."" Spoken like a true expert...
Peer 1 says: No one has ever seen an "infinite Hilbert space" in any experiment, nor have they seen a "quantum entanglement."So what's this? ...
Before embarrassing yourself any further, learn some quantum mechanics. That will answer your question. If it does not, then read section 1.3 of this paper: http://arxiv...
Since scientific arguments won't work. Maybe the scientific opinion of an expert should help sway the tide. Here it is, straight from the horse's mouth...